Africa Great Lakes Democracy Watch

Welcome toAfrica Great Lakes Democracy Watch Blog.Our objective is to promote the institutions of democracy,social justice,Human Rights,Peace, Freedom ofExpression, and Respect to humanity in Rwanda,Uganda,DR Congo, Burundi,Sudan, Tanzania, Kenya,Ethiopia, and Somalia. We strongly believe that Africa will develop if only our presidents stop being rulers of men and become leaders of citizens. We support Breaking the Silence Campaign for DR Congo since we believe the democracy in Rwanda means peace inDRC. Follow this link to learn more about the origin of the war in both Rwanda and DR Congo:http://www.rwandadocumentsproject.net/gsdl/cgi-bin/library

Monday, September 3, 2012

Rwanda: genocide ideology laws face judicial review

Rwandan opposition politician, Victoire Ingabire,
wins a partial victory in the first round in her fight against the
country’s laws governing genocide ideology.By International justice desk, Hilversum
High Court judges in Rwanda have partially suspended the trial of
opposition leader Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza until the country’s Supreme
Court rules on the constitutionality of the genocide ideology laws she
is challenging--laws that allow for the punishment of children as young
as 12 years old.
Victoire Ingabire launched a legal challenge in a Kigali court
earlier this week to nullify the laws related to “divisionism” and
“genocide ideology,” arguing they are too broad and being exploited by
Paul Kagame’s government to limit the freedom of thought.
The court on Monday suspended all debate about the controversial
ideology law, but decided to continue the proceedings against Ingabire
on the other charges she faces, including collaborating with rebel
groups to destabilize the country.
Ingabire maintains that the so-called “18/2008 laws” governing
genocide ideology are so abstract that even legal experts don’t
understand their meaning and scope.
Genocide ideology is defined in Rwanda’s penal code as “an aggregate
of thoughts characterized by conduct, speeches, documents and other acts
aiming at exterminating or inciting others to exterminate people basing
[sic] on ethnic group, origin, nationality, region, color, physical
appearance, sex, language, religion or political opinion, committed in
normal periods or during war.”Unconstitutional law?
“This is a controversial law that leads to different
interpretations,” says one Rwandan lawyer who wishes to remain
anonymous. He points out that because Rwanda has ratified the 1948
Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide,
the country is bound by it, and that the Genocide Convention supersedes
national law.
“The Rwandan law on genocide ideology aims to punish on the basis of
‘conduct, speeches, documents and other acts’ aimed at exterminating or
inciting others to exterminate people...,” says the lawyer. “This law is
not in conformity with the Geneva Convention since it does not
prescribe that the acts have to constitute a ‘direct and public
incitement to commit genocide,’” as the Convention stipulates.
Rwanda’s law, he says, is unconstitutional, since the Rwandan
constitution explicitly states that international treaties and
conventions adopted by the country must be upheld. He cites the list of
acts which, according to the current rules governing genocide ideology,
constitute a manifestation of the crime: "marginalizing, laughing at
one's misfortune, defaming, mocking, and boasting."
“The law is seen by many law specialists and human rights organizations as impossibly vague, broad and abstract,” reported Amnesty International in 2010.
The Rwandan lawyer agrees. “The Government of Rwanda, through its
Minister of Justice Karugarama, promised that it will amend those
controversial rules,” he told RNW. “But until now, they are in force and
have been used as an instrument to arrest the opposition against the
ruling party in Kigali.”New hope
The Rwandan government has indeed recognized the shortcomings of its
own laws and, in 2010, it initiated a review of the genocide ideology
law. Authorities invited international human rights advocacy groups,
including Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, to participate
in the process, but so far, the laws remain on the books.
If the government or parliament fail to amend the current laws—or
draft new ones—it could be left to the country’s Supreme Court, which
has the authority to declare the genocide ideology laws
unconstitutional. In the case of Victoire Ingabire, judges in the land’s
highest court now have the chance to do just that